Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Positioning System over Internet Protocol (GPSoverIP)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Courcelles 19:52, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global Positioning System over Internet Protocol (GPSoverIP) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article, while appearing to describe a new protocol, really serves as a coatrack on which to hang an advertisement for this one particular vendor's service. The protocol is described in vague enough terms to make it completely incomprehensible what actual innovation has been achieved, and the terminology appears in web searches only related to the one company that is developing this service. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.

• Delete per nomination. Coatrack spam (It fulfils all the key tasks of modern, high performance protocols....) and original research. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, many thanks for the objections. Depending on the corresponding approach of each individual, these observations are quite understandable.

The different points of view and perceptions of the participants in the discussions often make it impossible to get a uniform opinion on a particular topic.

For this reason I would like to take the opportunity to raise a few facts for discussion which possibly could enable a change of point of view and therefore the formation of a new opinion:

1. Standardized protocols (TCP/IP) are only to a certain extent suitable for transferring positions and data from moving objects into the mobile internet, and depending on the situation, often deliver defective results.
2. The requirements of users concerning telematics (one of the growth markets of the future) are getting more and more comprehensive and demanding. Since these requirements can only be implemented with difficulty and with limitations with the existing standards, a new technological basis would appear to be a good idea.
3. The developer, André Jurleit, has recognized this, and has decided to develop something with a team which is tailored exactly to these special conditions. André Jurleit has already been awarded for his efforts and for the development itself with a wide range of independent accolades:Convergator of the Year 2006; Deutscher Internetpreis 2007 (German Internet Prize;)Convergator of the Year 2008 (two times winner);Telematics Award 2010
4. The technology GPSoverIP (Global Positioning System over Internet Protocol) was created to transfer information in constellations where it is no longer possible with other solutions. This technology therefore offers a new basis for special areas of use.
5. Many well-known companies, associations or academic institutions such as Porsche, Deutsche Bahn, ADAC (Deutscher Automobil Club), Navigon and the Fraunhofer Institute have opted to use GPSoverIP technology or to begin a cooperation. In addition to this, a wide range of further companies and developers are already making use of this technology.
6. The technology itself was developed in Germany, the market in which it is most widely used, although it is now being used throughout Europe and also in Asia to an increasing degree.
7. The fact that a terminology is frequently only mentioned in the context of the relevant supplier/developer/producer is in the nature of the fact that one does not make one's intellectual property directly freely available to the entire industry. The depth of the functional descriptions is to be viewed in the same context. But for all this, we can't really expect an encyclopedia to provide directions that are detailed enough for making counterfeit products, can we? Is it not about making a topic understandable to those that have limited knowledge of it? For users to be able to look up what something means? How something works?

Finally, I want to make the point that a new standard exists when a development has established itself over several years and many are relying on it. In this context, information should then be available in encyclopedias and also in Wikipedia. --Paula2005 (talk) 12:08, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Creation comment was "Creating a new page; translation from german version". Existence in another wikipedia is not enough evidence for notability. There needs to be something written about it by an independent source (beyond advertising). Technically, do not see any innovation, since non-TCP protocols over IP have been in use since at least the 1980s. See User Datagram Protocol for example. So it just seems an advertisement. W Nowicki (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.